Here's a problem I see: in many cases, working through a passage with sufficient context requires on the order of 15-16 verses. Can that be done comfortably in 30 minutes using these kinds of techniques with a group that includes real beginners? I'm currently moving much slower than that, and it affects what we can discuss in the last 15 minutes.

The short answer (in my opinion) is no. I can't see being able to teach a 10-15 verse passage of Greek communicatively. But I wouldn't be discouraged by that. If the main objective of the class is application and spiritual growth, then it would be far more efficient to teach in English with some references to Greek. But I assume your students have a longer term goal of understanding the NT better via Greek. If that is the main objective, then stick on the communicative track. It's my belief that it produces genuine acquisition, it promotes a positive/pleasurable view of learning this very difficult language, and it sets up students to progress in their learning as autodidacts. Still, it's a shame to end a Sunday class without some spiritual lesson.

I'll make a suggestion in hopes that it spurs you on to a better idea. I would save a discussion of the application of the 10-15 verse passage at hand until the day when I would finish studying the entire passage. The delay may even increase anticipation in a healthy way. In the interim lessons, during the application segment, I would focus on comparison, in contrast to application. Facilitating comparative thought is a much underutilized pedagogical tool.

What comes to mind from elsewhere in the Bible that reminds you of this verse?
Look at examples (with teacher's help) of where this same Greek word/phrase was used.
Compare the author's expression to an alternate way of saying the same basic thought.

That's what little kids internalized as their core experience, along with lots of forms like δός, θές, ἐλθέ, στῆθι/ἀνάστηθι, κεῖσο, κάθισον, and probably especially . . . παῦσαι ποιῶν αὐτό ! ! ! .
In other words hit 70 FUNKY verbs really hard all the time, from the beginning.
They are more important than λῦσαι λύειν. Having the funky verbs inside provides a core that can build to fluency better than rules about λῦσαι λύειν. (yes, they get to have 's' aorist, 'k' perfect, and 's' future, too, almost as 'gimme's.)

Yeah, it's a different philosophy of language learning, but ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιγνώσεσθε αὐτούς.
And when they get really κεκμηκότες rules won't help as much as a gloss.

So focus on aorist and present, imperfect and future are straightforward if you know the present, don't sweat perfect and pluperfect for now. In my class, "don't sweat" means I'll explain how the verb functions, but won't worry about teaching these forms until later.

Jonathan Robie wrote:So focus on aorist and present, imperfect and future are straightforward if you know the present, don't sweat perfect and pluperfect for now. In my class, "don't sweat" means I'll explain how the verb functions, but won't worry about teaching these forms until later.

You can probably take care of a huge chunk of the perfect form by memorizing οἶδα, which is so idiosyncratic in morphology and semantics that it should be memorized separately anyway.

Jonathan Robie wrote:So focus on aorist and present, imperfect and future are straightforward if you know the present, don't sweat perfect and pluperfect for now. In my class, "don't sweat" means I'll explain how the verb functions, but won't worry about teaching these forms until later.

You can probably take care of a huge chunk of the perfect form by memorizing οἶδα, which is so idiosyncratic in morphology and semantics that it should be memorized separately anyway.

Good point. Adding to my curriculum plans for the first time this verb crops up ...